Because Trump is so dangerous & insane shouldn't we be voting exclusively on who has the best shot

[Quixote1818]

at him this round? Even if that means rejecting someone you really love for someone who may suck but at least will be sane? We are talking about the Supreme Court, all kinds of corruption that is just going to get worse and worse. All I can say is that I will be thinking long and hard when I get into that booth and be voting exclusively on who I think has the best shot at Trump. I do want to see the debates with Bloomberg in them. That is going to tell me a lot.

I am not saying who has the best shot yet. I have heard good arguments both ways. My body aches worrying about us making the right decision and this post is only to get us to think about deciding ONLY on statistically who you think has the best chance to beat Trump.

When you have a potential Hitler in place, shouldn't we all become experts only on statistic chances rather than perfect policy?

Yes, my handle is Quixote but Sancho was a bit sharper than me. I love tilting at Windmills but not this election.

Yes this is a push poll.

7 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
	Absolutely
	7 (100%)
	No, it's worth rolling the dice on leaving in a potential Hitler for 4 more years
	0 (0%)
	Different take. Explain below.
	0 (0%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll